Search

Background: The 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic, required the development of different diagnostic tests. While reverse transcriptase real-time PCR (RT-PCR) remains the first-line test of choice in acute infection diagnosis, anti-N antibodies serological assays provide a valuable tool to differentiate natural SARS-CoV-2 immunological response from that induced by vaccination, thus the goal of our study was to evaluate three serological tests agreement for these antibodies detection., Methods: Three anti-N different tests were examined in 74 sera from patients referred or not COVID infection: immunochromatographic rapid test (Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device Abbott, Germany), ELISA kit (NovaLisa® SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM NovaTech Immunodiagnostic GmbH, Germany) and ECLIA immunoassay (Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Roche Diagnostics, Manheim, Germany)., Results: Qualitative comparison of the three analytical methods revealed a moderate agreement between ECLIA immunoassay and immunochromatographic rapid test (Cohen kappa coefficient κ = 0.564). Correlation analysis indicated weak positive correlation between total Ig (IgT) detected by ECLIA immunoassay and IgG by ELISA test (p < 0.0001), the analysis of ECLIA IgT and IgM ELISA detected, showed no statistical correlation., Conclusion: Comparison between of three analytical systems available for anti-N SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies showed a general agreement when compared to detect total and G class immunoglobulins, while doubtful or discordant results have been highlighted for IgT and IgM class. Anyway, all the tests examined provide reliable results to assess the serological status of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: In acute coronary syndromes (ACS), the influence of cerebro-vascular disease (CVD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) on short-midterm outcome has been well established. Data on long-term outcome however, are limited. Our study aimed to explore the effect of CVD and PAD on long-term outcome in a cohort of unselected ACS patients, including ST-elevation (STE-ACS) and non-ST-elevation (NSTE-ACS)., Methods and Results: The population consisted of 2046 consecutive patients with a confirmed final diagnosis of ACS; 896 (44%) had STE-ACS and 1150 (66%) NSTE-ACS. CVD alone was present in 98 patients (5%), 282 (14%) had PAD alone, and 30 (1.5%) had both. All cause mortality at 5 years was lowest in patients without CVD/PAD (33%), intermediate in patients with either CVD or PAD (62% and 63%, respectively) reaching 80% in those with both CVD and PAD. These findings were confirmed in the STE-ACS and NSTE-ACS subgroups. CVD and PAD remained independent predictors of mortality after multivariable analysis, the combined presence of both carrying the highest risk within each ACS type (HR 4.15, 95% CI 1.83-9.44 for STE-ACS; HR 2.14, 1.29-3.54 for NSTE-ACS). Patients with CVD and/or PAD were less likely to be treated invasively and received less evidence-based treatment at discharge., Conclusions: Across the spectrum of ACS, extracardiac vascular disease harbors a negative long-term prognosis that worsens progressively with the number of affected arterial beds., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)